|
These are those days past, present and future since
the Son ascended to the right hand of the Father. Attempts to make connections
between verses (any) and events (any) illustrate why "we" are so many in
number (26,000 & counting). Lance
----- Original Message -----
Sent: March 17, 2004 10:24
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Last
Days
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004
22:32:37 -0800
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
The RCC needed reformation because it was
broken, not missing.
Plus, as several have told you, there
always has been a true church that existed outside the RCC.
I do not believe that the restituion of
all things has anything to so with the LDS.
DAVEH: I understand that,
Perry. Furthermore, even though that is my belief, I am not
trying to promote it here. What I am trying to do is find out why
the early Reformers did not claim the RCC folks had apostasies instead of
just suggesting their doctrines were broken.
Just another LDS prooftext.
DAVEH: I humbly believe you do not understand
the nature of my questions, Perry. May I suggest (again,
humbly) that you address the question I ask, instead of the question you
perceive I'm asking and let's see if we can have a more meaningful
discussion......please!
In fact, the only references to restoring all
things I found were in Matthew and Luke, when it states that Elijah will
restore all things...do you consider JS to be Elijah?
DAVEH: No.
If not, please give ma a chapter and verse.
DAVEH: ??? I do not understand. You
want me to give you chapter/verse for a negative answer?
No. If the verses in Matthew and Luke where Elijah
restores all things are not the verse you are referring to, then please lead
me in sctripture to where you are reading about the restituiton of all
things.
DAVEH: Sorry it is taking so long to respond to
your question, Perry. I've got a few minutes to kill while waiting to
leave, so I'll see if I can get this post out of my
inbox!
Let's start by saying I was reading about the
restitution of all things that you mentioned at the top does not apply to the
LDS Church. I'll highlight it in blue. So.....the question should
be addressed to yourself, shouldn't it? If you do not believe the restitution of all things has anything to so with the
LDS but you do believe it applies to something/someone
else....then to whom do you believe restitution of
all things has to do?
That is not to
say I don't think there need be a restoration.....quite the contrary. If
you want me to quote a Scripture that I think pertain to this prophesied event
........Mal 4: 5-6 & Mt 17:10-13 & Acts 3:19-21 & Rev 14:6-7 are a
few that I believe apply.
From: Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Last Days
Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004
23:59:55 -0800
Charles Perry Locke wrote:
If I may add a comment, there is a
difference between reformation and restoration. The protestant
movement was a reformation...JS' movement was a restoration. I see
them as quite different.
DAVEH: I
understand that, Perry. I'm trying to figure out why they went
with a reformation instead of a restoration. Seems like the
Bible suggests there would be a restitution (restoration) of all
things, rather than a reformation. Wouldn't it have been more
Biblical for the Reformers to think in restitution/restoration
terms? Is there Biblical evidence to suggest a reformation?
Luther thought the church had gone astray,
DAVEH: Yes.....That seems like a
perfect reason to suggest an apostasy had taken place in/by the
RCC. I'm surprised the Reformers did not consider such.
and reformed it to correct doctrinal error.
JS thought the church had totally apostatized, so totally resored
it. I dfon;t think the two can be compared.
DAVEH: I wasn't trying to compare
them. To me the restoration makes perfect sense from the
Biblical evidence of an apostasy, and subsequent restitution.
Yet the Reformers evidently didn't see it that way, but rather
preferred to consider that the RCC folks simply strayed a bit and
needed some reforming instead of restoring what was lost.
I agree with Luther (in that the
church had gone astray, and that reformation was due),
DAVEH: Since you agree with the early
Reformers, then perhaps you can answer my questions about
it......assuming you understand what I'm asking. Forget about JS
for a moment.....And consider the RCC folks. Do you think they
just had some bad doctrine that evolved over the years?
Or.....do you view them as apostates from the Primitive Church?
And, if they were Apostates....then wouldn't a restoration have made
sense from the Reformers' (or your) perspective? If not, there
must be some Biblical reason you/Reformers did not think a restitution
is/was necessary.....
but not JS.
DAVEH: Listen Perry.....I understand
that few TTers have any sympathy for JS. I'm not trying to
promote him in TT. I'm not asking you to believe him or his
teachings. But, my curiosity is certainly biased by what I know
and believe about his teachings....forgive me for that. What
interests me though is what reasons (Biblical) you (and Protestants in
general) believe the way you do when it seems so odd to me. I
hope that makes sense. For instance, I see the Bible speak about
a falling away (apostasy) and the need for a restitution (restoration)
of all things, and it fits into my theological and Biblical
inclinations. I hear your thinking about the RCC having some
skewed doctrines that needed reformed, and then the Reformers making
some minor changes.....and I don't see that in the Bible. It is
not that I'm trying to hit you over the head with this.....I'm just
trying to figure out why you see it your way when I see it another way
and we both are viewing it from a Biblical perspective.
Perry
--
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Hansen
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.langlitz.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
If you wish to receive
things I find interesting,
I maintain Five email lists...
JOKESTER, OPINIONS, LDS,
STUFF and MOTORCYCLE.
|
